Slightly off-topic, but I want to make a note that these bullshit news sources aren't without their value even if you want to seek out unbiased/accurate news. I find that reading sites my friends and family read help me keep in touch with why they hold the opinions that they do, why they support various arguments, etc, and knowing where biases come from helps me keep them out from my own life (or at least I try).

The BBC is also quite biased, but in its own way, and maybe not as much as your average US network. Reuters' behaviour w/r/t (pro-)war reporting is kind of disgusting. Reuters absolutely DOES spin things – though that spin is achieved more through filtering what is or isn't fit to report. [If I'm leaving out the AP in my criticism, it's not because I have that much more faith in them, it's only because I don't have evidence against them handy, so I'm leaving it at caveat emptor.] Unfortunately I don't know a good alternative. Some years back I would have said Al Jazeera, but they've also been co-opted (there was an actual scandal about this a few years ago when this came to light).

There's no single unambiguously "known good" news network that I would recommend unreservedly.

The best I can recommend is to use multiple sources, and whenever there's anything us-vs-them involved, always, ALWAYS bend over backwards to find out what the other side's actual viewpoint is, and really probe the question whether "they" could be right and "we" might be the baddies. If both sides are measured by the same standards, without any taken-for-granted "but we're the good guys" premises, do "we" still come out ahead? (Questions like these allowed me to notice for example that w/r/t to Russia/Putin, reddit is now a bastion of American Conservatism, where users are very heavily propagandised. Shout-out to the boys and gals at Edwards AFB.)

The problem with the multiple source approach is, it takes a lot of time, and the average viewer doesn't have that – which works in favour of those who pull the wool over the people's eyes.

It helps to have a framework of understanding. Read/view Chomsky books/talks to develop the requisite critical mindset. Protip: Ask cui bono. And again, go out of your way to listen to "the other side" – no matter how much people may sneer at you for "actually watching", say, Press TV or RT or CCTV, etc. When and how much such contempt is warranted is for you to find out. Another protip: Business press and established, quality conservative press (think CEO, not teabagger) can sometimes feature surprising honesty, because they don't always sugarcoat things – no need, since their typical readership is already firmly on their side. So what they write can be quite revealing if you have a framework of understanding.

These are the kind of posts that are absolute gold to me. Thank you. I'm immersed in that gentleman's talk. If you can think of any sparsely reported news stories that the world overlooked, please drop by and post them to /v/UnderReported!

That only covers my YouTube subscriptions. I have dozens more email / newsletter / websites other than what is listed above. The Internet is now your Global News Source, my friend. (Oh, and Voat, of course!)

See what you think of The Intercept. The Intercept is an online publication launched in February 2014 by First Look Media, the news organization created and funded by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar.[2] Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and Jeremy Scahill are the editors. via Wikipedia.

+1 for The Young Turks and Democracy Now! I feel like I would be well informed if I listened to nothing but those two shows. Great online news programs, though obviously liberal. Also since were mentioning online news, Citizen Radio is a great news / comedy podcast.